Member News
By John Mason - 5th February 2010
How far would a Labour government go in dismantling disability benefits? This has been a major topic of concern since the government produced its green paper: Shaping the future of care together.
Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and Disability Living Allowance (DLA) have either been the product of reform, or have been at the forefront of speculation about reform, or even abolition. DLA is also closely related to Attendance Allowance (AA) which benefits the over 65s.
While ESA is for people with some degree of incapacity for work, DLA (Middle or High Care Component) is for people who are severely disabled enough to require help from another person. Folk on DLA can in theory work and still receive DLA.
Perhaps the more contentious issue raised by the green paper was the future of AA and DLA for the over 65s.
The paper was apparently restricted to the future of care and support in England. However, any changes to AA and DLA would also have serious consequences for disabled people in Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
The paper stated: “We think we should consider integrating some elements of disability benefits, for example Attendance Allowance, to create a new offer for individuals with care and support services.”
It also said: “We want to ensure that people receiving any of the relevant benefits at the time of reform would continue to receive an equivalent level of support and protection under a new and better care and support system.”
The reference to ‘disability benefits’ led to concern that DLA would also be abolished. And the words ‘equivalent level of support’ caused widespread consternation as they could have meant almost anything. Many feared the worst. It took repeated questioning of government ministers to receive any clarification whatsoever.
Consequently, the government ‘categorically’ ruled out abolishing DLA for the under 65s. That might appear to safeguard the future of DLA, but does it?
DLA continues after the age of 65, so DLA for the existing over 65s faces the same uncertainty as AA; and, to make an obvious point, most people who are under 65 will become 65 one day! All people in receipt of DLA, therefore, face an uncertain future.
What of the ‘protection’ that is being offered to current recipients? Concerns have been raised and not adequately answered. Would the ‘protection’ be inflation proofed? Would the ‘protection’ be the responsibility of local authorities? What would happen if local authorities would not, or could not, meet it? And if an ‘equivalent’ was offered to existing disabled older folk, but not to future ones, would this not create a two-tier benefit system?
Also, from a devolved perspective, what happens if a UK benefit is abolished because of reform to care in England alone? Would Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland be allowed to continue operating AA and DLA? Or would the equivalent amount be transferred to the respective governments to do with as they wished?
ESA is more complex than the Incapacity Benefit it is replacing. It has two different groups and three different medical assessments. Some think it is a benefit designed to shift people off ‘incapacity’ and onto Jobseeker’s Allowance.
The government’s disability ethos is wrong. It is my view that DLA and AA offer stable constants to disabled folk: they should be fully maintained. They offer financial assistance in the face of the greater expense often incurred by disabled people. Only a few months ago, I sat on the committee examining the Welfare Reform Bill and there was cross-party agreement that disabled people should have increased rights to control provision of services. Yet now, by threatening to withdraw AA and DLA, the government threatens people with less control rather than more.
Regarding ESA, the emphasis should not be on driving ill and disabled people off that benefit, but rather on offering positive support in helping disabled people into work, and supporting them once there. I am also concerned that Independent Medical Assessments are not as fair, consistent, and independent as they should be. I raised this at DWP questions last Monday and, to be fair to the minister, he acknowledged there was a problem.
Of course we face difficult financial times, but government benefits policy must be more focused on valuing, protecting and supporting disabled people..
Dods Parliamentary Communications Ltd